home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   comp.lang.asm.x86      Ahh, the lost art of x86 assembly      4,675 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 3,687 of 4,675   
   R.Wieser to All   
   Re: Interpreting (the data following) a    
   05 Dec 18 09:39:09   
   
   From: address@nospicedham.not.available   
      
   Rod (and others),   
      
   > How did you get /6 here? ...   
      
   Thats part of the problem, because of the rather terse and confusing   
   explanation I had to make a guess to what I should look at.    As it   
   explicitily referred to the R/M bits I thought it applied to those.   
      
   The low three bits of 0x7E are 110b = 6.   
      
   I guessed wrong.   
      
   > Intel syntax uses "/digit" to represent a hard-coded Reg field value   
   > and "/r" to represent a register value for the Reg field.   
      
   :-)   That is what I missed in that explanation.   
      
   And than that the R/M *and* Mod fields where to be used as normally ofcourse   
   (it seemed to exclude the Mod part).   
      
   > See "B.17 Floating-Point Instruction Formats and Encodings" table   
   > B-38 of Appendix B in "Intel 64 and IA-32 Architectures Software   
   > Developer's Manual" Volume 2, Instruction Set Reference.  It may be   
   > differently labeled in some other version or AMD's manuals.   
      
   It has a different ID (B-23), but the same name in mine.  And yes, it would   
   have explained a lot.   I really need to remember searching the appendixes   
   too ...   
      
   > Ndisasm disassembly of the bytes given, i.e., D9 7E FA shows the   
   > following:   
      
   Yup.   Only too late I realized that I could (should?) have done that before   
   posting here.    (than again, I thought that I could learn to read that   
   explanation, which could possibly have served me in the future - forgoing   
   having to puzzle-it-out I mean).   
      
   This morning I made a list of 0xD9 ModRegR/M 0x90 sequences where I first   
   incremented the R/M, after that the Mod bits, disasembled them and saw they   
   matched up, as rick mentioned but I did not understand (conflicting info) at   
   the time, with the x86 usage.   
      
   That left the "/{number}" part to correlate with the Reg bits.    A quick   
   list creation and disassembly of that showed it to be correct.   
      
   So much for official documentation explanations I guess .... :-((   
      
   Thanks.   
      
   Regards,   
   Rudy Wieser   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca